Comments

Cheer leading for the Canuckleheads like McGuire when your supposed to be an impartial sports blogger ? Watch the video there is now way the linesman could have seen the toe at the speed Kesler was going OFFSIDES by a mile!

Posted by
Mark in Cali
from San Diego on 06/02/11 at 01:34 AM ET

offsides by a mile? didn’t know a mile was half an inch long. interesting.
and where is paul cheering for the canucks? he voices his opinion on a controversial situation.

no whistle, no offside. it’s as effin easy as that. jeez ...

and it’s quite hilarious to see boston fans, of all people, complain about a blown call.

uh, and thanx, mark: if the linesman couldn’t have seen clearly whether kesler was offsides or not, how could he have possibly made the right call? in dubio pro reo.

a) Great work getting that photo. 1st time I’ve been here, but I’ll keep checking in if you continue to post quality content like this.

b) The guy who said ‘by a mile’ should be banned from posting anything ever again. Even bulletin boards are off limits, pal.

c) I don’t see how any neutral could argue the calls went the Canucks’ way last night:

- There were 3 penalties on the play where Kesler drove to the net: the one initially called (interference on Seidenberg), hooking by Boychuk to knock Kessler off balance, and that terrible cheap shot/hip check by Marchard which sent Raymond face first into the boards. All 3 were obvious by a mile and 2 were completely ignored.

- And Krejci cross-checking Hamhuis’ head was totally uncalled for and bushleague. And getting only 2:00 was a joke, ESPECIALLY when Sedin got 4:00 for his highstick on Chara.

- And what about the official who was 100 ft. away who negated the VAN 5-on-3 by calling an interference penalty on Burrows when he was cross-checked into Thomas? No way he saw that unless he was wearing X-ray goggles.

That’s all I can remember at the moment, but come on people. If you wanna complain about that one call that was less than an inch either way, you’d better bring up the other horrible decisions as well.

d) That was a tremendous hockey game. We are in for a treat if they continue to play at this level. That scrum at the end of the 1st was old school and made for great entertainment!!

Posted by
Clinton B
from Los Angeles on 06/02/11 at 06:34 AM ET

burrows made that contact, whether initial or not, with thomas way out of the blue paint in the slot (!) - so no penalty! weird that the one official on the other end of the rink made the call instead of the one being 10 feet away from the action ...

and, again, the last thing a bruins-supporter should do is to whine about officiating.

Cheer leading for the Canuckleheads like McGuire when your supposed to be an impartial sports blogger ? Watch the video there is now way the linesman could have seen the toe at the speed Kesler was going OFFSIDES by a mile!

Posted by Mark in Cali from San Diego on 06/02/11 at 12:34 AM ET

Cheering for the Canucks. Nope, just pointing out a play that had some controversy to it.

Yes, I picked Vancouver in five because people have asked, but I really don’t care who wins.

I am only going with Vancouver because the chowderheads have had world series, superbowls, and oh yeah,, that round ball stuff. Enuff already with Boston. I like Tim Thomas, but Bruins with the Cup? don’t think so. Western Conference again please

- And Krejci cross-checking Hamhuis’ head was totally uncalled for and bushleague. And getting only 2:00 was a joke, ESPECIALLY when Sedin got 4:00 for his highstick on Chara.

sorry dude, but did you watch that replay? Krecji barely touched him, he was already cowering on the ice before he got there. And Hamhuis hurt HIMSELF in the leg during the late hipcheck he threw, so get over that. And you know whats bushleague? biting…

And I dont know if you know the rules, but blood is 4 mins all the time. And if nothing else the nucks have gotten away with about 30 high sticks in the playoffs…

Posted by
pstumba
on 06/02/11 at 10:58 AM ET

When I watched the replay, I wasn’t sure his skate was actually on the ice when the puck crossed the line. The photo doesn’t really help me much there - hard to tell if the skate blade is on the blue line or over it.

Still - calls like this go both ways sometimes. The linesman made a call, and even if you don’t think it’s the right call it’s pretty ridiculous to make any accusation of bias.

I’m outright rooting for the Bruins. I thought that play was offsides (and like Da lil Guy points out, this still frame doesn’t make it 100%), but based on this evidence, I’m leaning towards that being the right call.

As far as this:

c) I don’t see how any neutral could argue the calls went the Canucks’ way last night:

I didn’t really see a bias one way or another. Kesler ran his toe behind Thomas’ leg to sweep him, ending that 5-on-3. If we want to argue cross-checks in front of the net not being called, we’re sending WAY more people to the box, including Hamhuis and Bieksa, as well as Ference and Boychuk. I thought that entire process, starting with the Hamhuis clipping was just not well-called and the refs decided to add ugly on top of ugly trying to make things right that they had screwed up.

They let a lot of things go on both sides. The only thing I’m really angry about from the refs as a whole was their refusal to give Henrik Sedin a diving penalty during a post-whistle scrum when he took what could have been called a cross-check and fell over like a newborn deer. I felt that, in a game full of embellishments from both sides, that was the worst one of the bunch and not giving out a penalty there makes me horribly afraid that the rest of the series is going to be chock-full of flopping, which would be an embarrassment to the game.

I thought he might be offsides last night. Even backed up the dvr to try to do a frame by frame and the angle that the nbc live camera had looked to have him offsides. The camera angle probably plays a part in that though. If it was offsides, it wasn’t an incompetent call, just a judgement call. Only way to get it 100% right on a something that close is some sort of lazer or gps system.

Henrik’s embellishment is annoying for sure. But when you have the refs calling every little tick and tack they are pretty much encouraging this behaviour. This game didn’t start until the middle-to-end of the 3rd period when the refs put their whistles away. No flow, no rhythm, just special teams locked in each end.

I don’t understand this strategy of calling penalties for the first half of the game and then letting everything go after that. You have a 5 on 4 for Vancouver then Boston (Peverley) is called for another must-call infraction (hooking) which the refs don’t want to makel but they have to. So, what do they do? They even it up almost instantly, with a very, very marginal call against Burroughs (tripping), a call they don’t make for the rest of the game in spite of more egregious incidences. Everyone in the building knows is to even up the score. Its so obvious its painful.

At the end of the day both teams get close to the same number of calls so I guess you could call it ‘even’. They only people who are short-changed are those watching the game.

I just wish the refs would get out of the way so we can watch the two teams play.

That photo was a freeze frame from the CBC-TV cameras… no photoshop… clearly not offside. Give the linesmen some credit, they’re eyes are trained for that, just like the line judges in tennis… and those tiny fricking tennis balls are travelling at upwards of 120 km/h.

Posted by
Al
from Toronto on 06/02/11 at 01:17 PM ET

If it was offsides, it wasn’t an incompetent call, just a judgement call.

Yeah, to argue this call is the same in baseball when they ball hits the first baseman’s glove one microsecond before the runner touches the bag and it’s called safe, or vice versa. Calls like this really are judgement calls. The ref isn’t privy to the slo-mo, HD, ten angle instant replays that we are. If it takes 10 different angles find one that MIGHT point to him being offside, then you can’t really get on the linesmen for that…

I’m 100% rooting for the Bruins, but that was a just a really good play.

All this focus on an offside call… I don’t think anyone can say definitively whether it was or was not.

But nobody seems to be talking about the blown call on Burrows clipping Thomas outside the paint. The Nucks would have had a 5on3 for 90 seconds which could blown the game wide open. So the nucks deserved a call in their favour…

Posted by
zebra
on 06/02/11 at 01:59 PM ET

Without complete access to the entire sequence there can be no judgement with any certainty. Sure, his skate came down AFTER the puck crossed, prior his skate was in the air.

Posted by
USHA#17
on 06/02/11 at 02:11 PM ET

I was born in Boston and am rooting for the Bruins but I am ok with that call, tie goes to the runner as they say in baseball and I believe both hockey and soccer have similar legal definitions of offsides. They really need to start calling diving BY ITSELF, Henrik’s was absolutely pathetic and I will also admit Thomas dived a bit on the interference call against Burrows that negated the 5 on 3. This diving is only going to get worse if they don’t start calling it by itself.

The rule technically is the ENTIRE blade must be on the ice not just a portion so it probably would still be an offside call. Too tough to tell at full speed, but the picture itself isn’t the end all evidence to say it was onside.

Really, the PP was terrible and the reason Boston lost

Posted by
Brad
from Calgary on 06/02/11 at 03:51 PM ET

Brad - WRONG.

Rule 83 states that the entire skate must cross the line. If any portion of the blade is in the blue then there is no offside. Here’s the quote from the book:

“A player is off-side when both skates are completely over the leadingedge of the blue line involved in the play. A player is on-side when either of his skates are in contact with, or on his own side of the line, at the instant the puck completely crosses the leadingedge of the blueline”

Posted by
AngleofD
on 06/02/11 at 04:07 PM ET

The rule technically is the ENTIRE blade must be on the ice

What? It says nothing about the entire blade being on the ice. It says that both skates must be completely over the blueline, and the entire skate was clearly NOT across the blue line before the puck.

“83.1 Off-side - Players of the attacking team must not precede the puck into the attacking zone.

The position of the player’s skates and not that of his stick shall be the determining factor in all instances in deciding an off-side. A player is off-side when both skates are completely over the leadingedge of the blue line involved in the play.

A player is on-side when either of his skates are in contact with, or on his own side of the line, at the instant the puck completely crosses the leadingedge of the blueline regardless of the position of his stick. However, a player actually controlling the puck who shall cross the line ahead of the puck shall not be considered “off-side,” provided he had possession and control of the puck prior to his skates crossing the blue line.

It should be noted that while the position of the player’s skates is what determines whether a player is “off-side,” nevertheless the question of an “off-side” never arises until the puck has completely crossed the leading edge of the blueline at which time the decision is to be made.

If a player legally carries or passes the puck back into his own defending zone while a player of the opposing team is in such defending zone, the off-side shall be ignored and play permitted to continue.”

Why are all the Bruins fans calling it “offsides”? There is no “s”. Anyone who calls it “offsides” has in invalid argument because you clearly don’t know that much about hockey if you’re going to screw up a frequently used word in the game.. just saying.

Posted by
C
on 06/02/11 at 05:37 PM ET

Why are all the Bruins fans calling it “offsides”? There is no “s”. Anyone who calls it “offsides” has in invalid argument because you clearly don’t know that much about hockey if you’re going to screw up a frequently used word in the game.. just saying.

This is always fun.

*ahem*

Anyone who calls it “in invalid argument” has an invalid argument because he or she clearly does not know that much about arguments if he or she is going to screw up a frequently used language in the process.

So, these comments are very interesting. And funny. Very very funny.
Anywho, I’m a Canucks fan, but I have to agree that Henrik dropped it like it was hot.
It wasn’t even a falling back motion, he just dropped straight down >.<

Anyone complaining about the reffing though should just get used to it, I mean, honestly.
Blown calls happen all the freaking time both ways every game. Some just…. more obvious/frustrating/annoying than others.

That all being said, I’m looking forward to however many games are left.
No hard feelings when the Canucks win, ok Boston fans? =p

Posted by
Marthelas
from Vancouver on 06/03/11 at 03:47 AM ET

Here is a high definition clip from CBC’s live broadcast which irrefutably demonstrates that Kesler was onside and therefore that the goal was 100% legitimate. As the following video at 0:55 shows, Kesler’s skate is still scraping the blueline after the puck had fully crossed the blueline:

You can even clearly see the spray caused by Kesler’s toe pick being dragged across the ice, proving that his skate was in physical contact with the blueline.

Kesler was onside Truthers. Deal with it.

Posted by
Tiger Tail
from Toronto on 06/03/11 at 08:18 AM ET

In a case such as this the benefit should clearly go to the official, however if there was definitive proof available I wanted to find it. Through the high quality equipment available in the TSN studios, Rick Hodgson, Associate Producer talked me through the play frame-by-frame this afternoon as we looked to make sure that Ryan Kesler’s toe drag held the line as the puck crossed. Sure enough the evidence was there.

I asked Rick to tell me where Kesler’s toe was the moment that he saw the puck cross the inside edge of the blue line and where he would see white ice? Rick said Ryan Kesler’s toe was in contact with the inside edge of the blue line in that instant. “GREAT CALL” I shouted to Rick.